themerlin wrote:Article about this in the chronicle. It's the height of the barrier not the traffic that's the issue and they are going to think about it till June !

It's odd that after years the height of the barrier is suddenly a problem - has there been an incident involving a cyclist or pedestrian recently.

I cycling past this morning and saw the signs for the first time. The alternative as I see it means taking the Toombul Road exit then crossing to the right lane and making a u-turn onto the Sandgate Road on-ramp onto the other side of the overpass. It's difficult to see how crossing the overpass is any more dangerous.

Hmmmm, and the reason is - a cyclist complained that the overpass is unsafe. From the Bicycle Queensland Facebook page.

Bicycle QueenslandNo good news I'm afraid. We've been in conversation with Mains Roads about this for a couple of months. They have responded to a complaint by a cyclist about lack of safety on that overpass by having a safety audit which recommended the signs you have seen. So we've been asking Main Roads what the long-term solutions for this problem are, but we're yet to have an answer. Looks like that ban is there for the foreseeable future. It's a debateable question as to which is better ... merging across two lanes of Sandgate Rd traffic to ride across an overpass bridge with no shoulder, or negotiating the Toombul Rd roundabout and then the u-turn onto the onramp. Neither is a particularly good level of service for cyclists.

I'd bet my last dollar the "cyclist complaint" is part of am orchestrated PR strategy by Main Roads, in relation to complaints by less than 5 motorists, about cyclists using the overpass. In other words, pro motorist anti-cyclist bureaucratic BS. Considering the nastiest near misses I've had on the overpass have been by BCC bus drivers, I'd hazard a guess the complaints have been by the BCC bus drivers' representative union.

And I don't feel the least bit paranoid in thinking the above

The Chronicle article.

Last edited by PawPaw on Sat Feb 18, 2012 8:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.

OK Ron, Monday I am phoning the Chronicle and Main Roads to find out whether the cyclist complaint was singular or plural, and whether they are prepared to reveal the source of the complaint.

I am gob smacked that one cyclist's complaint could result in 3 pairs of signs, and a review that will take 5-6 months and possibly hundreds of public servant manhours to complete, considering Main Roads engineers wuold have no doubtedly devoted same when building the overpass.

I'll also broach the subject that cyclists are tax payers, just like motorists....and would Main Roads equally consider shutting down a main road for 6 months on the basis of one complaint by a pedestrian.

edit: to my mind, this action by main roads is a classic case of systematic desensitization. where a soft approach is taken (complaint by one of our own), resulting in a soft response by Main Roads (investigation into cyclist safety), but comprehensive at that (6 months), ending with (permanent banning of cyclists) after period of behavioral adaptation to alternative routes.

BTW, the idiot PR people at Main Roads don't realize how ridiculous their best angle is. If ONE complaint from a pedestrian or cyclist can result in a 6 month closure of access to an overpass or tunnel or whatever, there must be at least 300 similar singular complaints Main Roads deserve to be flooded with about unsafe guard rails etc.

BCC give us some more bikeways fore safe travel!!!!Upgrade the NCL now QR!!!!!!http://nakedcyclistbrissy.blogspot.com/My views do not represent any organisation I may be apart of unless otherwise stated